Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21358741›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Drug discovery2011

Cell death assays for drug discovery.

Oliver Kepp, Lorenzo Galluzzi, Marta Lipinski, Junying Yuan, Guido Kroemer

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Drug discovery, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 242 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
242citing papers in PubMed
32.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

242 citing papers in PubMed, 552 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Synthesis of Novel Chloro-Benzo [Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Fluorescent carbon dots for discriminating cell types: a review.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2024
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

182 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Oliver KeppINSERM, U848, F-94805 Villejuif, France.
Lorenzo Galluzzi
Marta Lipinski
Junying Yuan
Guido Kroemer
Harvard University · USInserm · FRUniversité Paris-Saclay · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cell death has an important role in many human diseases, and strategies aimed at modulating the associated pathways have been successfully applied to treat various disorders. Indeed, several clinically promising cytotoxic and cytoprotective agents with potential applications in cancer, ischaemic and neurodegenerative diseases have recently been identified by high-throughput screening (HTS), based on appropriate cell death assays. Given that different cell death modalities may be dysregulated in different diseases, it is becoming increasingly clear that such assays need to not only quantify the extent of cell death, but they must also be able to distinguish between the various pathways. Here, we systematically describe approaches to accurately quantify distinct cell death pathways, discuss their advantages and pitfalls, and focus on those techniques that are amenable to HTS.

Indexed as

Biological AssayAnimalsApoptosisAutophagyCell AdhesionCell DeathCell-Free SystemCellsColoring AgentsDrug DiscoveryDrug Evaluation, PreclinicalHumansIntracellular SpaceMitosisNecrosisColoring Agents

Identifiers

PMID21358741
OpenAlexW2047219888

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.